A guide for media about runaway and homeless youth. Research compiled from Federal documents, published articles, reports, and caller data from the National Runaway Switchboard.
Report Prepared by Jennifer Benoit-Bryan at the University of Illinois-Chicago
Report Release Date September 2011
Full Report in PDF
Introduction
What is the definition of a runaway? Throwaway?
How many runaway and throwaway youth are there in the United States?
How do youth survive when they are a runaway, or a throwaway?
What are the demographics of a typical runaway/throwaway?
What are the impacts of running away or being thrownaway on youth?
What can a parent do to prevent their child from running away?
Why do youth run away?
Trends in Runaway Youth Statistics
About the National Runaway Switchboard
The Reporter's Source Book (RSB) is designed to be a guide for media about runaway and homeless youth. It contains information compiled from federal reports, journal articles, issue briefs, and crisis calls to the National Runaway Switchboard. The 2011 RSB contains eight issue briefs that summarize the major issues surrounding runaway and homeless youth. The topics of these briefs are:
- The definition of a runaway
- The number of runaways/throwaways in the U.S.
- How youth survive on the run
- The demographics of a typical runaway/throwaway
- The impacts of running away on youth
- How parents can prevent their child from running away
- Why youth run away
- Trends in runaway statistics
The RSB is not a comprehensive collection of research on homeless and runaway youth. Instead, it provides a range of research results relevant to the key issues surrounding runaway and homeless youth that can help journalists obtain the information to fuel public dialogue.
The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) defines a runaway/throwaway episode as:
A runaway episode is one that meets any one of the following criteria:
-
A child leaves home without permission and stays away overnight.
-
A child 14 years old or younger (or older and mentally incompetent) who is away from home chooses not to come home when expected to and stays away overnight.
-
A child 15 years old or older who is away from home chooses not to come home and stays away two nights.
A throwaway episode is one that meets either of the following criteria:
-
A child is asked or told to leave home by a parent or other household adult, no adequate alternative care is arranged for the child by a household adult, and the child is out of the household overnight.
-
A child who is away from home is prevented from returning home by a parent or other household adult, no adequate alternative care is arranged for the child by a household adult, and the child is out of the household overnight (Sedlak, Finkelhor, Hammer, & Schultz, 2002).
It is difficult to say exactly how many youth are classified as runaways or throwaways, because studies define and count this group in different ways. Studies vary in the age ranges included, lengths of time away from home, survey methods, and definitions of runaways, which can lead to different findings. In addition, this is a very difficult group to track with multiple sub-populations of youth staying in different areas (on the street, at a friend’s home, in a shelter) which causes estimates to range in size.
- In 1992, approximately 2.8 million youth between the ages of 12 and 17 ran away from home (J. Greene, Ringwalt, Kelley, Iachan, & Cohen, 1995).
- The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention estimated that roughly 1.7 million youth (4 percent) between the ages of 7 and 17 had a runaway or throwaway experience in 1999 (Hammer, Finkelhor, & Sedlak, 2002).
- The National Survey on Drug Use in 2002 found that about 1.6 million youth (7 percent) between the ages of 12-17 had run away from home and slept in the street in the previous year (Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2004).
- The prevalence of youth homelessness for a one-year period (measured as a percent of youth who had experienced at least one night of homelessness in the last 12 months) is higher (Ringwalt, Greene, Robertson, & McPheeters, 1998) than the prevalence of adult homelessness for a five-year period (Link et al., 1994).
- A study by the Urban Institute found that one in five youth have run away from home by the age of eighteen and half of those youth run away two or more times (Pergamit, 2010).
The National Runaway Switchboard (NRS) collected statistical data on over 16,302 calls in 2010 from or about youth in a variety of situations including youth in crisis or contemplating running away, runaways, homeless, and throwaway youth (National Runaway Switchboard, 2010). The largest proportion of calls comes from runaway youth at 40 percent (see graph 1 below).
Graph 1: Crisis Caller Status in calls to the National Runaway Switchboard in 2010
A study contracted by NRS and conducted by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago involved interviewing 83 youth living on the streets and in shelters. This study found that most youth did not plan their departure and had $10 or less when they left home. These circumstances force most runaway youth to find a source of money to survive on the street (Pergamit & Ernst, 2010).
Runaway/throwaway youth sometimes turn to illegal, and dangerous, activities to survive. About 10 percent of youth in runaway/homeless youth shelters have turned to trading sex for money, food, shelter, drugs, or other subsistence needs. The numbers for those on the street are worse – as many as 28 percent of street youth have engaged in survival sex (J. Greene, Ennett, & Ringwalt, 1999). Youth who engage in survival sex are two to three times as likely to have been robbed, assaulted, or physically abused after running away. Nearly one-third (30 percent) of youth in shelters have dealt drugs to survive on the street (Sedlak et al., 2002).
But many youth find other means of support. Over 70 percent of callers, who provided the National Runaway Switchboard’s (NRS) front line team with information about their means of survival in 2010, cited friends or relatives as a source of support (National Runaway Switchboard, 2010).
Exact figures of how long youth are gone can be difficult to track, but the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) estimates that in 2001 over 75 percent of youth are gone for less than one week. In contrast, 46% of crisis callers to NRS in 2010 had been away from home for over a week when they called (see Table 1). The OJJDP estimates also suggest that most runaways don’t leave the state, but rather stay within 50 miles of their homes (Hammer et al., 2002).
Table 1: Prevalence and Percentage of Runaway Youth by Time on the Street
|
Duration
|
OJJDP Study Estimate 2002**
|
OJJDP Study Data % (n=1,675,100)
|
NRS Crisis Call Data 2010
|
NRS Crisis Call Data % (n=8,636)***
|
|
Less than 1 Week
|
1,304,100
|
77%
|
4,650
|
54%
|
|
1 Week to less than 1 Month
|
248,000
|
15%
|
1,808
|
21%
|
|
1 Month to less than 6 Months
|
123,000
|
7%
|
1,572
|
18%
|
|
More than 6 Months
|
NA *
|
NA *
|
606
|
7%
|
*The NISMART Study does not have a category for greater than six month’s runaway duration.
** The sample size is based on all participants who answered this question.
*** This data is based on all crisis calls from 2010 in which the caller reports the duration of the runaway episode during the call.
back to top
There is no easy way to define what a runaway looks like – they can be male or female and range in age and hometown. However, the statistics below show differences in runaway rates for a variety of demographic variables.
Females seem to make up the majority, or at the very least, are more likely to reach out for help. Call data collected by the National Runaway Switchboard (NRS) in 2010 showed that 71 percent of crisis callers under the age of 18 were female, and 29 percent were male (National Runaway Switchboard, 2010). The longitudinal study found that ten percent of girls report having run away from home compared to only seven percent of boys (Benoit-Bryan, 2011a). The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP) found that females are more likely to seek help from shelters and hotlines (Hammer et al., 2002). In addition, females are more likely to run away multiple times than male youth (Thompson & Pollio, 2006).
Table 2: The Prevalence and Percentage of Runaway Youth by Age
|
Age (years)
|
OJJDP Study Estimate**
|
OJJDP Study Data % (n=1,682,700)
|
NRS Crisis Call Data 2010
|
NRS Crisis Call Data Percent (n=7,512***)
|
|
7-11 Years
|
70,100
|
4%
|
174
|
2%
|
|
12-14 Years
|
463,200
|
28%
|
702
|
9%
|
|
15-17 Years
|
1,149,400
|
68%
|
3,491
|
46%
|
|
18-21 Years
|
Not Applicable*
|
Not Applicable*
|
3,145
|
41%
|
* The NISMART Study defines youth as under age 18.
** The sample size is based on all participants who answered this question.
*** This data is based on all crisis calls from youth who provided their age during the call.
Data from a study conducted by the OJJDP shows that the majority of runaway youth are aged 15-17 (Hammer et al., 2002). This measurement is confirmed by the National Runaway Switchboard’s 2010 crisis call data, in which 46 percent of youth crisis callers are between the ages of 15 and 17 as shown in table two (National Runaway Switchboard, 2010).
The predominant race for runaways is White, non-Hispanic (57 percent), followed by Black, non-Hispanic (17 percent), Hispanic (15 percent), and Other (11 percent) according to the NISMART Study as shown in table three (Hammer et al., 2002). The longitudinal study examined the effects of race on runaway rates. The study found that Hispanic respondents are more likely to run away from home at 10.8% of respondents compared to non-Hispanic respondents at 8.2%. African American respondents are less likely to run away at 7.5% compared to 8.2% of non-African Americans. American Indian / Native American respondents were more likely to have run away at 12.9% than non-American Indian / Native Americans at 8.4%. Almost 11% of Asian or Pacific Islanders had run away compared to 8.4% of non-Asian or Pacific Islanders (Benoit-Bryan, 2011b).
Table 3: The Prevalence and Percentage of Runaway Behavior in youth by Race in 2002
|
Race/Ethnicity
|
OJJDP Study Estimate
|
OJJDP Study Data % (n=1,682,900)
|
|
White, non-Hispanic
|
963,500
|
57%
|
|
Black, non-Hispanic
|
283,300
|
17%
|
|
Hispanic
|
244,300
|
15%
|
|
Other
|
188,900
|
11%
|
In addition, the longitudinal study found significant differences in runaway rates for individuals born in and born outside of the United States. Only 6.2% of individuals who were born outside of the United States ran away from home before turning 18, significantly less than the 9.6% of respondents who were born in the United States (Benoit-Bryan, 2011b).
Two geographical dimensions were also found to impact runaway behaviors. Among youth who are in school, those attending urban schools were more likely to run away from home than adolescents attending suburban or rural schools (Hammer et al., 2002). In terms of region of the country, youth living in the Southern United States were least likely to run away from home, followed by youth in the Northeast and Midwest, while youth from the West were the most likely to run (Hammer et al., 2002).
The longitudinal study is the first nationally representative study to measure the differences in runaway rates by sexual orientation. Heterosexuals had the lowest run away rate at 7.6%. The highest run away rate was reported by bisexuals at 21.7%, almost three times higher than the rate for heterosexuals. Homosexuals were also more likely to run away from home at 13% than heterosexuals (Benoit-Bryan, 2011b).
A new longitudinal study conducted at the University of Illinois, Chicago with support from the National Runaway Switchboard examines the long term impacts of running away from home as an adolescent on health, economic, and justice system outcomes in adulthood. This longitudinal study is the first study to use nationally representative data to examine the consequences of running away as an adolescent on adult outcomes.
HEALTH IMPACTS
The longitudinal study found that running away from home as an adolescent increases the odds of having suicidal thoughts as an adult by 51%. An even stronger relationship was found between suicide attempts and previous run away experience, with runaways having over three times higher odds as non-runaways of attempting suicide as adults (Benoit-Bryan, 2011b).
These findings line up with a number of other studies that look at suicide thoughts and suicide attempts by current runaways. In a study by Yates et al, a convenience sample of 765 visitors to an outpatient clinic in 1985 was analyzed to show that suicide attempts by runaway youth were over four times higher than for non-runaway youth (Yates, MacKenzie, Pennbridge, & Swofford, 1991). An analysis of youth in shelters using data from the Runaway / Homeless Youth Management Information System found that 31% of youth in shelters have had suicidal thoughts (Thompson & Pollio, 2006).
Homeless and runaway adolescents are six times more likely to have two or more mental disorders than their non-homeless peers (Whitbeck, Chen, Hoyt, Tyler, & Johnson, 2004). A study conducted in 2010 found an erosion of mental health over time, the longer a youth was on the street without stable housing, the worse their mental health (Cleverley & Kidd, 2010). Caller data from the National Runaway Switchboard suggests that youth who call have already taken steps toward ensuring their safety. Of youth who disclose how they are surviving, 70 percent have help from friends and relatives as shown in graph 2 (National Runaway Switchboard, 2010).
The longitudinal study also reported significant correlations between runaway behavior as an adolescent and physical health. Someone who ran away from home as an adolescent has odds 44% higher of having health issues that prevent them from doing moderate activities than someone who never ran away from home. They also rate their general health in adulthood lower than non-runaways (Benoit-Bryan, 2011b). The reason for this difference in general health rating may stem from the fact that runaway youth do not have reliable access to health care and are at greater risk of some health problems than non-runaway youth. A survey of youth in shelters and on the street found that half of street youth and 36% of shelter youth had no regular source of health care. In addition, the study found that 25% of street youth and 18% of shelter youth reported having had serious health problems in the past 12 months (Tucker, Edelen, Ellickson, & Klein, 2011). Another study used a convenience sample of 765 visitors to an outpatient clinic in 1985 and found that runaway youth are at greater risk of a number of medical problems and health-compromising behaviors including pneumonia, scabies, depression, prostitution, and drug use (Yates et al., 1991).
Adults who ran away from home are more likely to use cigarettes and marijuana than those who never ran away from home. The likelihood of an individual being a smoker as an adult are over twice as high (2.4 times) for former runaways than for individuals who never ran away from home. Former runaways are 67% more likely to use marijuana as an adult than non-runaways. However, alcohol use as an adult is not significantly associated with former runway status (Benoit-Bryan, 2011a). Higher use of cigarettes and marijuana in adulthood by former runaways may stem from higher use during runaway episodes. In a sample of youth in shelters and on the street, the likelihood of substance abuse was higher among runaway youth than non-runaway youth (J. Greene et al., 1995). Another study surveyed adolescents about their drug use and found a correlation between youth who had run away in the past twelve months and the use of alcohol, marijuana, and other illegal substances (Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2004).
In terms of sexual health, a number of studies show that runaways engage in survival sex (J. Greene et al., 1999), (Cleverley & Kidd, 2010). In addition, runaways report higher than average levels of pregnancy (J. M. Greene & Ringwalt, 1998). In fact, the odds of pregnancy in the year following a runaway episode are 1.67 times higher for former runaways than non-runaways (L. Thrane & Chen, 2011). High rates of survival sex and pregnancy may indicate that runaways engage in more sexual activities with more sexual partners than non-runaways. Another study with a convenience sample found that runaways are six to twelve times more likely to become infected with HIV than non-runaways (Rotheram-Borus et al., 2003). The effects of these differences can be seen in the longitudinal survey’s findings on the correlations between sexually transmitted diseases and former runaway behavior. The study found that former runaways are 53% more likely to report having a sexually transmitted disease as an adult than non-runaways (Benoit-Bryan, 2011a).
ECONOMIC IMPACTS
The longitudinal study found significant impacts of former runaway behaviors on income and education levels. The annual personal income level of adults who ran away from home as adolescents is $8,823 lower on average compared to adults who never ran away from home. The odds of having someone in your household who is a recipient of AFDC, public assistance, or welfare are 76% higher for adults who ran away as an adolescent compared to individuals who never ran away from home (Benoit-Bryan, 2011a). For current runaways, a study by the Federal Youth Services Bureau found that about 40% of youth in shelters and on the street were from families receiving public assistance compared to 22% of youth in general (J. Greene et al., 1995).
In terms of education levels, the longitudinal study found that the likelihood of not having a high school degree or GED as an adult is 50% higher for former runaways than non-runaways. Adults who ran away from home as adolescents have lower education levels on average than adults who never ran away from home (Benoit-Bryan, 2011a). It is probable that the lower education levels of former runaways are connected to disruption in schooling during a runaway episode. An analysis of youth in federally funded shelters found that 20% of runaway youth, 20% of homeless youth under age 16, and 50% of homeless youth age 16 or older reported having dropped out of school, having been expelled, or having been suspended (General Accounting Office, 1989). Another study found that over one quarter of youth interviewed six months after their stay at a runaway or homeless youth shelter exhibited serious problems in school enrollment. These problems include dropping out of school, being expelled or suspended, and being in jail, and thus, unable to attend school (Westat, Inc., 1997). In addition, seven percent of crisis callers to the National Runaway Switchboard in 2011 talked about problems with school (National Runaway Switchboard, 2010).
A study commissioned by NRS and conducted by NORC, in which 83 runaway youth were interviewed on the streets or in shelters found that nearly 45 percent of youth attended school, with 70 percent of those attending regularly. This concentration is more common among shelter youth who have a place to stay and because shelters may help facilitate getting to school. Nearly two-thirds of shelter youth attended school, while 28 percent of street youth continued attending school (Pergamit & Ernst, 2010).
JUSTICE SYSTEM IMPACTS
Former runaways have higher arrest rates as adults and are more likely to deal drugs as an adult according to the longitudinal study. The odds of former runaways being arrested as adults are over two and a half times higher than individuals who never ran away from home. Former runaways are 99% more likely to sell drugs as an adult than non-runaways. However, being a former runaway does not increase the rates of crimes committed in adulthood for damaging private property, stealing, buying, holding, or selling stolen property, committing financial fraud, and shooting or stabbing someone (Benoit-Bryan, 2011a).
Most studies that look at criminal behavior and runaways are concurrent; they examine reports of criminal behavior while the adolescent is on the street. The NISMART II study found that 11% of runaways engaged in criminal activities while on the run (Hammer et al., 2002). An analysis of youth in shelters found that almost 16% have committed misdemeanors (Thompson & Pollio, 2006). While a study conducted by the Federal Youth Services Bureau found that 2/3 of shelter youth and 4/5 of street youth had attempted or completed a theft (J. Greene et al., 1995). A longitudinal study using a sample of 360 from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being also found that delinquent behaviors were higher for former runaways than non-runaways (Tyler, Johnson, & Brownridge, 2008).
However, runaways do remain connected to networks of friends and family while on the street. More than half report that friends know where they are, while 26 percent have reported that parents and 25 percent have siblings who know their whereabouts. Over half of youth interviewed had access to a cell phone at least some of the time and over 20 percent had their own cell phones. In addition, youth stay connected through e-mail with over 70 percent of youth reporting access to e-mail via public libraries, shelters, or at friends’ homes (Pergamit & Ernst, 2010).
Graph 2 - Means of Survival for Crisis Callers to the National Runaway Switchboard in 2010
Runaway prevention begins long before problems arise. If a child is talking to his or her parent, it’s important for the parent to pay attention to their child, as the child can tell if the parent is more focused on the TV than the conversation. As children mature into adolescence, parents are encouraged to acknowledge and support the adjustment to a new stage in life. This may mean empathizing with the child’s experiences and considering situations from his or her viewpoint. Parents should also share their feelings and make clear their expectations from the child. An open environment for sharing feelings encourages children to come to parents sooner if they have problems. In fact, positive parenting1 leads to a statistically significant decrease in runaway episodes and an increase in school engagement (K. Tyler et al., 2008). Another study found that youth in dysfunctional families with abuse or neglect will runaway earlier and more frequently than youth in stable families (L. E. Thrane, Hoyt, Whitbeck, & Yoder, 2006).
Sometimes actions speak louder than words. Certain behaviors can indicate a child is considering running away. These include:
- Changes in behaviors or patterns (child stops eating/overeats, sleeps all day/not at all, mood swings)
- Rebellious behavior
- Disclosure of intentions to run away
- Accumulation of money and possessions
If parents suspect their child might run away, it’s important to confront the situation right away. Expressing concern that the child may run away and offering to listen if the child needs to talk are good first steps. It’s important to make clear to the child that the parents don’t want the child to run away (National Runaway Switchboard, 2011). The National Runaway Switchboard (NRS) is also available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, as a resource for parents or children in this difficult situation. NRS can provide safe options for children considering running or already on the street.
1 - Positive Parenting is a composite variable created from three parental constructs: parental monitoring, closeness with primary caregiver, and relationship with primary caregiver – for more information on operationalization of these variables see original study.
back to top
The strongest predictors of running away by adolescents include contact with the juvenile justice system, failing at school, and parental alcohol abuse (Van Houten & Golombiewski, 1978). In addition, family conflict, physical/sexual abuse, and throwaway status may contribute to runaway behavior.
Family Dynamics
In one study, almost half of the youth interviewed said parent/guardian conflicts were a problem before they left home and landed in a runaway or homeless youth shelter. Another study, conducted with shelter personnel, suggested that a problematic relationship with a parent or another adult at home led to running away 75 percent of the time (General Accounting Office, 1989). In 2010, 29 percent of crisis callers to NRS identified family dynamics as a problem for them (National Runaway Switchboard, 2010).
Throwaway
Nearly half of youth in runaway or homeless youth shelters have been kicked out of the home at least once (Sedlak et al., 2002). According to the Research Triangle Institute, more than half of youth in shelters and on the street were either kicked out or told their parents they were leaving and the parents did nothing to stop them (J. Greene et al., 1995).
Abuse
Physical or sexual abuse drives youth onto the street – and in some cases, keeps them there for fear that returning home may mean a return to abuse. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention found 21 percent of runaway / thrownaway kids had physical or sexual abuse in their history, or were afraid of suffering abuse if they went home (Hammer et al., 2002). A three-city study found a third of runaway youth suffered sexual abuse before leaving home, and 43 percent were victims of physical abuse (Molnar, Shade, Kral, Booth, & Watters, 1998). The nationally representative longitudinal study found significant correlations between previous abuse and runaway rates. Verbal abuse, physical abuse, and sexual abuse before the age of 18 are all correlated with higher run away rates. Individuals who were verbally abused are over twice as likely to run away from home at 11.7% compared to those who were not verbally abused at 5.3%. The likelihood of running away from home is three times higher for respondents who were physically abused as youth at 17.4% than those who were not physically abused at 6.3%. Children who were sexually abused are over twice as likely to have run away from home at 17% as those who were not sexually abused at 7.9% (Benoit-Bryan, 2011a).
A longitudinal study conducted in 2011 by Tucker et al examined a number of variables to identify the significant predictors of runaway behavior. The research found that substance use, depression, and lack of parental support were all significant predictors of runaway behavior in youth (Tucker et al., 2011).
Crisis calls from or about a youth in crisis to the National Runaway Switchboard (NRS) indicate that alcohol and drug use, economics, emotional and verbal abuse, and family dynamics play a role in putting youth at risk of running away from home as shown in graph three below (National Runaway Switchboard, 2010).
Graph 3 - Problems Identified by Crisis Callers to the National Runaway Switchboard in 2010
The National Runaway Switchboard (NRS) has analyzed records of crisis calls to 1-800-RUNAWAY for the 11-year period 2000-2010 to obtain these trends, with a maximum trend horizon of 10 years.
A number of important trends emerge through the analysis of the past 11 years of crisis call data from NRS. NRS is receiving more calls from homeless youth and throwaway youth than in the past. Increases in calls from homeless and throwaway youth may be related to the current economic downturn in the United States. In addition, there has been a 30 percent increase in crisis callers who identify economics as an important problem in their lives over the past three years.
The use of shelters as a means of survival has increased by 30 percent over the last three years to 10 percent of all crisis callers. The availability and continued funding of shelters through the economic downturn has been instrumental in assisting runaway and homeless youth in surviving. An increased number of youth report accessing assistance from law enforcement for survival. However, the fastest growing problem identified by callers over the past year was gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) issues with an increase of seven percent. Individuals who want to talk about GLBT issues may feel more comfortable calling NRS now than in the past due to the positive partnership NRS has developed with Cyndi Lauper’s True Colors Fund.
A greater proportion of older youth (aged 18-21) and youth who have been on the street for over six months are calling the National Runaway Switchboard than in previous years. The number of calls to the crisis hotline from youth aged 18, 19, 20, and 21 has grown by over 200 percent over the last decade and by over 20 percent over the past three years.
The effects of the National Runaway Switchboard’s Home Free partnership with Greyhound Lines, Inc. is evident in the 24 percent increase in crisis calls from individuals at a Greyhound station over the last three years. This collaboration provides free bus tickets home or to an approved alternative living situation to runaway youth. There has also been a 95 percent rise over the last decade and a 21 percent rise over the last three years in youth calling the National Runaway Switchboard for assistance with transportation (Benoit-Bryan, 2011b).
back to top
The National Runaway Switchboard, established in 1971, serves as the federally-designated national communication system for runaway and homeless youth. Recognized as the oldest hotline of its kind in the world, NRS, with the support of more than 150 volunteers, handles an average of 100,000 calls annually – more than 3 million calls since the organization’s inception. Through hotline and online services, NRS provides crisis intervention, referrals to local resources, and education and prevention services to youth, families and community members throughout the country 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Over 14,000 youth have been reunited with their families through the NRS Home Free program done in collaboration with Greyhound Lines, Inc. The NRS crisis hotline is 1-800-RUNAWAY. For more information, visit
www.1800RUNAWAY.org.
Media interested in additional information or to schedule an interview with an NRS spokesperson, please contact Joel Kessel at
joel@kesselcommunications.com, or (614) 467-9083.
References
Benoit-Bryan, J. (2011b). A Decade of Trends in Crisis Calls to the National Runaway Switchboard. National Runaway Switchboard.
Benoit-Bryan, J. (2011c). National Runaway Switchborad Crisis Caller Trends. National Runaway Switchboard.
Cleverley, K., & Kidd, S. (2010). Resilience and Suicidality Among Homeless Youth, 34(5), 1049-1054.
General Accounting Office. (1989). Homeless and Runaway Youth Receiving Services at Federally Funded Shelters ( No. GAO/HRD 90-45). Washington DC.
Greene, J. M., & Ringwalt, C. D. (1998). Pregnancy Among Three National Samples of Runaway and Homeless Youth. Journal of Adolescent Health, 23(6), 370-377.
Greene, J., Ennett, S., & Ringwalt, C. (1999). Prevalence and Correlates of Survival Sex Among Runaway and Homeless Youth. American Journal of Public Health, 89(9), 1406-1409.
Greene, J., Ringwalt, C., Kelley, J., Iachan, R., & Cohen, Z. (1995). Youth with Runaway, Throwaway, and Homeless Experiences... Prevalence, Drug Use, and Other At-Risk Behaviors. Administration for Children and Families. Youth Services Bureau.
Hammer, H., Finkelhor, D., & Sedlak, A. (2002). Runaway / Thrownaway Children: National Estimates and Characteristics. National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Thrownaway Children. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Link, B., Susser, E., Stueve, A., Phelan, J., Moore, R., & Struening, E. (1994). Lifetime and Five year Prevalence of Homelessness in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 84(12), 1907-1912.
Molnar, B. E., Shade, S. B., Kral, A. H., Booth, R. E., & Watters, J. K. (1998). Suicidal Behavior and Sexual / Physical Abuse Among Street Youth. Child Abuse & Neglect, 22(3), 213-222.
Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2004). Substance Use Among Youths Who Had Run Away from Home. National Survey on Drug Use and Health.
Pergamit, M. (2010). On the Lifetime Prevalence of Running Away from Home. The Urban Institute.
Pergamit, M., & Ernst, M. (2010). Runaway Youth’s Knowledge and Access of Services. The Urban Institute.
Ringwalt, Chritopher, Greene, J., Robertson, M., & McPheeters, M. (1998). The Prevalence of Homelessness Among Adolescents in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 88(9), 1325-1329.
Rotheram-Borus, M. J., Song, J., Gwadz, M., Lee, M., Van Rossem, R., & Koopman, C. (2003). Reductions in HIV Risk Among Runaway Youth. Prevention Science, 4(3).
Sedlak, A., Finkelhor, D., Hammer, H., & Schultz, D. J. (2002).
National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Thrownaway Children - II.
Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Thompson, S. J., & Pollio, D. E. (2006). Adolescent Runaway Episodes: Application of an Estrangement Model of Recidivism. Social Work Research, 30(4).
Thrane, L. E., Hoyt, D. R., Whitbeck, L., & Yoder, K. A. (2006). Impact of Family Abuse on Running Away, Deviance, and Street Victimization Among Homeless Rural and Urban Youth. Child Abuse & Neglect, 30, 1117-1128.
Thrane, L., & Chen, X. (2011). Impact of Running Away on Girls’ Pregnancy. Journal of Adolescence.
Tucker, J., Edelen, M., Ellickson, P., & Klein, D. (2011). Running Away From Home: A Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Risk Factors and Young Adult Outcomes. Journal of Adolescence, 40(5), 507-518.
Tyler, K., Johnson, K., & Brownridge, D. (2008). A Longitudinal Study of the Effects of Child Maltreatment on Later Outcomes among High-risk Adolescents. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 37, 506-521.
Van Houten, T., & Golombiewski, G. (1978). Adolescent Life Stress as a Predictor of Alcohol Abuse and / or Runaway Behavior. National Youth Alternatives Project.
Westat, Inc. (1997). National Evaluation of Runaway and Homeless Youth. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration on Children, Youth and Families.
Whitbeck, L., Chen, X., Hoyt, D. R., Tyler, K. A., & Johnson, K. (2004). Mental Disorder, Subsistence Strategies, and Victimization Among Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Homeless and Runaway Adolescents. Journal of Sex Research, 41(4), 329-342.
Yates, G. L., MacKenzie, R., Pennbridge, J., & Swofford, A. (1991). A Risk Profile Comparison of Homeless Youth Involved in Prostitution and Homeless Youth Not Involved. Journal of Adolescent Health, 12, 545-548.